Free Traffic Legal Advice

I wish to thank everyone in advance for any help offered

The driver went to pick up a family from a cruise ship almost two years ago. There was a delay in disembarkation meaning the driver got to the pick up point a bit too early and was instructed by cruise staff to the adjacent car parking area. Obviously there is no chance of remembering who the staff member was now after all this time.

Over the course of the next two years there has been no letters or correspondence of any sort until a Moneyclaim letter arrived through the letterbox Last weekend.

I have been through this process with the forums help before and the parking company backed out before going to court.

Any advice again would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for the quick reply

I have now filed an acknowledgment of service.

I will download an example of a SAR and use that as a template

ParkingEye replied the same day ....



"Thank you for your email.

In order for us to ensure that the information we provide is your personal data, we would require further identifiers and clarification of the data sought.

If this request pertains to a Parking Charge you have received, please advise of any reference numbers that apply, your full address at which it was issued and the relevant vehicle registration.

If your request solely pertains to vehicle data, we will require evidence of your continued status as registered keeper. Thus, we would require further identification documents.

Please provide the following:

•    Your full name

•    Your full current address shown on your log book (V5C)

•    A copy of your log book (V5C) for proof of continued status as Registered Keeper"



Will a scan of my passport be enough?

ParkingEye has not yet replied to my SAR and I would not expect them to until after my defence has been filed.

I need to get a defence ready to file but have no idea what to write down. Can someone please post something I can use and tweak to suit my needs.

I got this from my last time on here. Is it still ok to use?



1. The Defendant denies the claim in its entirety. The Defendant asserts that there is no liability to the Claimant and that no debt is owed. The claim is without merit and does not adequately disclose any comprehensible cause of action.

2. There is a lack of precise detail in the Particulars of Claim (PoC) in respect of the factual and legal allegations made against the Defendant such that the PoC do not comply with CPR 16.4.

3. The Defendant is unable to plead properly to the PoC because:

(a) The contract referred to is not detailed or attached to the PoC in accordance with CPR PD 16(7.5);

(b) The PoC do not state the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions of the contract (or contracts) which is/are relied on;

(c) The PoC do not adequately set out the reason (or reasons) why the claimant asserts the defendant has breached the contract (or contracts)

(d) The PoC do not state with sufficient particularity exactly where the breach occurred, the exact time when the breach occurred and how long it is alleged that the vehicle was parked before the parking charge was allegedly incurred;

(e) The PoC do not state precisely how the sum claimed is calculated, including the basis for any statutory interest, damages, or other charges;

(f) The PoC do not state what proportion of the claim is the parking charge and what proportion is damages;

(g) The PoC do not provide clarity on whether the Defendant is sued as the driver or the keeper of the vehicle, as the claimant cannot plead alternative causes of action without specificity.

4. The Defendant attaches to this defence a copy of a draft order approved by a district judge at another court. The court struck out the claim of its own initiative after determining that the Particulars of Claim failed to comply with CPR 16.4. The judge noted that the claimant had failed to:

(i) Set out the exact wording of the clause (or clauses) of the terms and conditions relied upon;

(ii) Adequately explain the reasons why the defendant was allegedly in breach of contract;

(iii) Provide separate, detailed Particulars of Claim as permitted under CPR PD 7C.5.2(2).

(iv) The court further observed that, given the modest sum claimed, requiring further case management steps would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective. Accordingly, the judge struck out the claim outright rather than permitting an amendment.

5. The Defendant submits that the same reasoning applies in this case and invites the court to adopt a similar approach by striking out the claim for the Claimant’s failure to comply with CPR 16.4.

Statement of truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signed: